1 Dr Michael Carey, Forestry and Management Consultant. Email: careyml@eircom.net.2 Avondale is now owned by Coillte Teoranta, The Irish Forestry Board.

• In 1903 it was agreed that actionwas needed to address the lowwoodland cover in Ireland that hadreached an all time low in moderntimes.

• There was little informationavailable at the time on what werethe best species to plant in aforestry programme.

• The action was addressed thoughthe purchase by the State ofAvondale estate near Rathdrum inCo Wicklow and the laying down ofa large series of species trials inaddition to the establishment of aforestry school.

• Between 1905 and 1913, 49 ha ofland were planted in 104 differentplots, with 84 tree species: 46coniferous and seven broadleaf. Afurther 16 rare species brought thetotal species planted to 100.

• The conifers far outperformed thebroadleaves. The best performersincluded Sitka spruce, Corsicanpine, Douglas fir, grand fir, Lawsoncypress, European larch, Norwayspruce, western hemlock andwestern red cedar.

• Beech, hornbeam, pedunculateand sessile oak, Spanish chestnutand sycamore were the mostpromising broadleaves.

The Avondale Initiative 1905Michael Carey1

Silviculture / Management No. 19

© COFORD 2010

IntroductionBy 1903 the area of woods and plantations in Ireland had been reduced to some122,000 ha, representing a landscape cover of about 1.6%, probably the lowestpoint in historic time. The lack of woodland led to a consensus for action toaddress future wood supplies. This centred on the laying down of a series of fieldtrials to determine the most suitable tree species for Ireland’s forestry programmeand the setting up of a forestry school for working foresters in which young mencould be trained in plantation establishment and management. Although landlordsintroduced many tree species to the country, and planted quite extensively aroundtheir demesnes and manors during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, therewas no scientific information available on the best species or on how they shouldbe managed.

Enquiries regarding a suitable site for the venture commenced in 1903, duringwhich various localities were considered but it was finally decided to purchaseAvondale near Rathdrum in Co Wicklow for the project2. The decision in favour

Avondale 1890s. J. Poole Addey.

COFORDDept. Agriculture, Fisheries & FoodAgriculture House, Kildare StreetDublin 2, IrelandTelephone: +353 1 607 2487Email: info@coford.iehttp://www.coford.ie

Eighteenth century Spanish chestnut planted by SamuelHayes. The tree has a circumference at breast height of6.0 m.

3 Forbes, A.C. 1946. The Forestry Revival in Eire. Irish Forestry 4: 11-26.4 Royal Society Minutes. 1768. The Society became known as the Royal Dublin Society after 1820.5 Fraser, Rt. 1801. General view of the County of Wicklow. Statistical Survey of County Wicklow. Royal Society, Dublin.6 The forest area of Co Wicklow subsequently increased from 7,000 ha in 1906 to over 32,000 ha in 2007.7 Forbes, A.C. 1946 op. cit.

Ireland’s earliest celebrated tree planters, Samuel Hayes, inthe eighteenth century, the property later came into thehands of Charles Stewart Parnell in second half to thenineteenth century. The older planted woodland and trees onthe estate dated back to the second half of the eighteenthcentury. Samuel Hayes was a prolific tree planter, and in1768 was awarded a gold medal by the Royal Society for‘having planted out since October last 2,550 beech treesunder five years old not nearer to each other than fifteenfeet’.4 Many of these, and a limited number of otherspecimen trees, notably European larch, sessile oak, silverfir, Spanish chestnut and walnut, planted by Hayes, are stillto be seen around the estate. Hayes died in 1795 but clearlyleft his mark. The traveller, Robert Fraser, writing in 18015,refers to ‘the improvements of Avondale made by the lateColonel Hayes, a name truly endearing to all who feel theenthusiasm of extending zeal for the rural arts’. Hementions plantations of larch and large specimens ofWeymouth pine and on ‘the front and side of the house largebeech trees and remarkably well-grown fir, particularly thespruce’.

1905 Forestry Action PlanFollowing its acquisition, Arthur Forbes, a 37 year-oldlecturer in Forestry from Armstrong College of Science,Newcastle-Upon-Tyne, was chosen to drive the initiative atAvondale. Forbes was described as being ‘dynamic’ andwas well acquainted with the history of forestry in Britainand Ireland and convinced as to its importance in theeconomic life of a country. His attitude was described asbeing essentially commercial; he had little time for socialforestry or the acquisition of land for that purpose.Subsequently he became the first Director of Forestry inIreland.

Avondale was seen to have advantages as a site because ofits location in the centre of a relatively well-wooded district,and its proximity to the Wicklow Uplands where there wereopportunities for forestry expansion6. These views were notshared entirely by Forbes, however, who felt it was, in manyways, ‘not too suitable’ for the purpose for which it hadbeen acquired. He felt the area was somewhat on the smallside to allow work to be carried out on economic lines andthat ‘the bulk of it was fairly good tillage land not usuallydevoted to tree planting’7.

of Avondale was probably influenced by an approach byJohn Parnell, who had inherited the estate, to theDepartment of Agriculture with a proposition: ‘to place theestate under the Department as an experimental farm inpart of which trees would be grown and experimented whichwould do for all parts of Ireland from Wicklow to Galway aswe have so many diversified positions such as valley, hill,sea, lake and mountain exposures’3.

Excluding tenanted holdings and outlying portions of theproperty unsuitable for forestation, the Avondale estatecomprised the present country house and outbuildings,about 80 ha of unplanted grassland and 120 ha of woodland.The outlying areas, mostly mountain land, amounted tosome 1,200 ha. A price of £9,870 was paid for the wholeproperty. Most of the land within the demesne was undergrass at the time with a number of scattered trees and asmall area (0.8 ha) under tillage.

Avondale has an interesting history and strong associationwith forestry in recent centuries. The home of one of

The first Avondale forestry team(1904/1905).Included are: Andy Stewart,George Farrell, John Murphy,John OʼLoughlin, Matt Byrne,Martin Murphy, John Carey andEdward Johnson.

8 Forbes, A.C. circa 1915. Avondale Forestry Station. General Description and Progress of Work 1906-12. Department of Agriculture and TechnicalInstruction for Ireland.

9 Forbes, A.C. 1915. ibid.

Table 1: Main genera planted at Avondale between 1905 and1912.

Section Main genus Numberof plots

Total Areaha

1 Maples 4 1.212 Elms 4 1.21

3 Beech, Spanish chestnut,Hornbeam 8 3.23

4 Oaks 14 5.265 Silver firs 7 2.836 Spruces 7 2.837 Pines 14 4.858 Larches 7 5.669 Cedars 2 1.0110 Ashes 9 2.7311 Chestnut coppice 1 4.4512 Locust tree coppice 1 2.4213 Douglas firs 2 2.8314 Hemlock 2 1.2115 Cypress and Junipers 3 1.21

16 Western Red Cedar, Redwoods,Cryptomeria 4 1.61

17 Hickory, Walnut, Plane, Tulip tree 10 2.0218 Cherries 2 1.6119 Poplars 3 0.80Total 104 49.00

The Experimental PlotsThe area was divided into 19 sections with separate speciesbeing allocated to a series of plots within each section. Thelayout is shown in Figure 1. Table 1 gives a breakdown ofthe species planted and the number of plots in each section.

Despite these reservations, Forbes set about the task withenthusiasm and decided to turn the main part of the propertyinto a forest experimental station on the lines of acontinental forest garden. In addition to the training offoresters, he saw one of the main objectives as being to‘prove as far as this can be done in one place, on a limitedarea, the cost of production, yield in timber and thecomparative market of the species planted’8.

Between 1905 and 1913 approximately 49 ha of land wereplanted mostly along the Great Ride in 104 different plots.Most of the plots were 0.4 ha in area. Planting was alsocarried out on the slopes leading down to the AvonmoreRiver. Overall 84 tree species were planted, including 46coniferous and 38 broadleaves. Pure groups of 16 species(nine coniferous and seven broadleaf and other rarespecimens) were also planted in situations considered‘likely to suit them’9. This brought the total number ofspecies planted to 100. Given the paucity of informationavailable at the time on species selection, the initiativerepresented a milestone in Irish forestry. Some species wereplanted pure, others in mixture with nurses - mainly larchand Norway spruce. Most of the planting took placebetween 1905 and 1907.

Figure 1. The original layout of the experimental plots, Arboretum and Pinetum at Avondale 1905. The Roman numerals referto the Section numbers shown in Table 2. Refer to column 1 in Table 2 for location of each genus.Source: Forbes, A.C. Avondale forestry station. General description and progress of work, 1906-12. Department of Agriculture and Technical Instruction for Ireland.

10 Equivalent to about €4,680-€7,020 today (Liam Kennedy, personal communication).

The following are some of the main features of the plots:

• None of the plots were replicated. Although thisrepresented a shortcoming in terms of experimentaldesign, the growth pattern recorded for the differentspecies enabled judgements to be made on theirsuitability for Irish conditions. The soils at Avondale,although mainly light in texture, are generally relativelyfertile and suitable for growing trees.

• Before planting commenced, the whole area wasploughed, apart from the sloping area adjacent to theriver that contained some scrub.

• All plants were sourced as 2+2 transplants, 30-60 cm inheight according to species. Difficulty was experiencedin sourcing some rare species with the result that qualityvaried.

• Planting commenced in the autumn of 1905 was done bydigging pits and continued on into the two followingwinters.

• Filling in and planting of species slow and difficult toprocure continued until 1912.

• Average costs for planting, including labour, trees andreplacement of failures over the first three years aregiven as £12-£18/ha10.

• A single tree of the same species in each plot wasplanted on the Great Ride. This enabled the speciesincluded within the plot to be easily identified and thegrowth of the trees under free growing and forestconditions to be studied and compared.

• Species mixtures were used in many of the plots in orderto reduce the cost of plants and to minimize the risk offrost damage. Frost was seen as a risk factor which waswell founded, in that some of the more susceptiblespecies, notably Sitka spruce and silver fir, weredamaged in the early years after planting. The followingprinciples applied in the case of the mixtures:

- The species intended to represent the main cropformed at least 25% of the total number planted. Ageneral planting distance of 1.22 m (4 feet) apartprovided about 1,682 main crop trees and 5,045 nursetrees/ha.

- Nurse species were either closely allied to the maincrop, or, as in the case of larch, capable of beingcommercially harvested at an early age. Europeanlarch and Norway spruce were the two most commonlyused nurse species.

- Pure crops of all the important species were plantedside by side with the same species in mixture, with aview to monitoring their growth and developmentunder both conditions.

- Larch and Norway spruce were mainly used to nursethe broadleaf species. Scots pine was used as a nursefor most of the more unusual pines, with commonsilver fir used for the fir section. Beech was used as anurse with larch and oak and ash with oak, walnut,American ash, hickory and the tulip tree. Silver fir andash failed as nurse species due to frost damage. In mostcases larch outgrew all other species whichnecessitated cutting back its side branches.

General appearance of the plots, sections I-IV, circa 1913. Note the house in the background to the right.Source: Forbes, A.C. Avondale forestry station. General description and progress of work, 1906-12. Department of Agriculture and Technical Instruction for Ireland.

Under planting initiative in the1950sIn the 1950s it was decided to under plant a number of theoriginal plots with shade tolerant species, a decision that ledto some controversy and criticism at the time. ‘The decisionto under plant was influenced by the fact that thebroadleaved plots, apart from beech and hornbeam, and thepine and larch plots, had 50 years growth of briar, furze,hazel and other species and were an impenetrable jungle. Itried having inspection paths opened through it but itproved impracticable. We therefore cleared the undergrowthout of a face. The question was how to keep the ground clearfor the future. It was then that Tom OCarroll came up withthe idea of under planting with shade bearing species. Hebrought along the then Chief Inspector, Sean O’Sullivan,and duly talked him into agreeing with his proposal. It mustbe admitted that O’Sullivan had reservations about what heconsidered the fundamental change to the character of theplots. He agreed, however, to give the proposal his blessingon the understanding that the new planting would not beallowed to become a constituent of the crop’11.

The end result was a number of the plots, notably the elms,some of the Corsican pine plots in addition to the Scotspine, Weymouth pine and Monterey pine plots were underplanted with a variety of species, the most common beingwestern hemlock, Lawson cypress, Douglas fir, grand firand western red cedar. One promising plot of Corsican pinewas under planted with beech in 1957, but the beech hasgrown poorly. Douglas fir also grew poorly when underplanted whereas the shade-tolerant western hemlockperformed well.

Unfortunately, concern about the under planted trees notbecoming a constituent of the crop was more or less ignored

in subsequent years, even though thinning was carried out.This resulted in shade tolerant species becoming dominantover time in a number of the plots, notably the elms.

Species performanceThe performance of the various species is summarised inTables 2-7.

Fir (Abies) species

The fir species tested are shown in Table 2.

Grand fir was the outstanding performer. European silver firwas also used as the nurse species in all the plots andreplaced where it failed with the same species. It showed thegreatest vulnerability to frost of all the fir species.

Spruce (Picea) speciesTable 3 is a list of the spruce species tested and theirperformance.

All spruce species grew well for the first few years but Sitkaspruce was by far the most vigorous. It was also the bestperformer despite having suffered badly from both frost andaphid damage in early years.

Apart from Norway spruce, none of the other sprucesshowed any potential. (P. omorika was best of these. TheP. smithiana was planted later in 1916).

No nurse species was used for either Sitka spruce orNorway spruce. However, lines of Japanese larch wereplanted on the boundary of the Sitka spruce planted in 1926.Norway spruce and red spruce were used as nurses for otherspecies.

Table 2: Fir species originally planted at Avondale and notes on performance.

Species Common name Yield class12 Performance

A. procera Noble fir 16 Good growth but frost damage initially. Felled in 1964, age 58 years. Reached top heightof 24 m.

A. grandis Grand fir 26 Very good growth. Two rotations since 1906. Wind damaged.A. nordmanniana Caucasian fir 16 Frost damage initially. Top height of 26 m at age 68.A. concolor Colorado fir 16 Severe frost damage. Poor quality with multiple stems. Top height 26 m age 68. Blown in

1974.

A. alba European silver fir 16 Severe frost damage. Blown in 1974. Top height 27.5 m. Poor qualityA. cephalonica Greek fir 20 Severe frost damage. Quality poor.A. numidica Algerian fir Poor Planted in 1916. Referred to by McCusker.

11 Grateful acknowledgement is extended to Mr Michael O’Donovan, former Region Manager, Coillte, Cork Region, for this account. He was House Masterat Avondale at the time.

12 Potential maximum mean annual volume increment, in m3 ha-1 yr-1.

Table 3: Spruce species planted at Avondale and notes on performance.Species Common name Yield class PerformanceP. sitchensis Sitka spruce 20 Very good. However, severely frosted initially and also suffered aphid damage. Fomes noted.

The plot planted in 1926 currently has a top height of 35 m and mean DBH of 67 cm.

P. abies Norway spruce 14-16 Good. Pure NS was blown in 1990s. Reached top height of 30 m. NS planted in mixture withpedunculate oak (which was suppressed) has a top height of 29.7 m and DBH of 55.9 cm.

P. smithiana Morinda spruce - Started well but did not persist. Replaced.P. jezoensis Japanese spruce - PoorP. omorika Siberian spruce - Grew well but died off after about 55 years. Attractive appearance.P. alba White spruce - PoorP. pungens Colorado spruce - PoorP. nigra/mariana Black spruce - PoorP. rubens* Red spruce - Poor* Used only as nurse species.

Sitka spruce on the left of the Great Ride,looking south. Planted in 1926.

Pines (Pinus) species

The pine species planted are outlined in Table 4. The main findings were:

Corsican pine grew well and performed best on its own. It was suppressed whenplanted in mixture with either Norway spruce or European larch. The quality ofthe pure stand of Corsican pine that was under planted with beech in 1957 is verygood. The plot currently has a mean height of 29.2 m and a DBH of 54.3 cm.

Radiata (Monterey) pine was and continues to be very impressive where itsurvived. Scots pine is medium quality. No detail on seed source. Macedonianpine appeared promising.

Lodgepole pine was not tested until 1964 when it was planted in one of the clearfelled Abies procera plots. It grew vigorously and was of poor form and blewover as is typical on fertile sites. The species was extensively planted on poorsoils in Ireland between 1970 and 2000.

Corsican pine planted 1905-1910. Height 30m. Mean diameter at breast height 54.3 cm.

Larch (Larix) species

The larch species tested are shown in Table 5. European larch andJapanese species grew best. Many fine specimens of both are stillpresent, particularly in plots of the other species where they were usedas nurse species.

Beech, Norway spruce and larch were used as nurse species for thelarch plots. Tyrolese larch performed poorly. Lack of information onthe west American larch suggests it also grew poorly although extraseed for the species was sourced in 1910. Larix x eurolepis (hybridlarch) was not tested until the 1970s.

Other conifer species

Other conifer species tested are outlined in Table 6.

Douglas fir, western red cedar, western hemlock, Lawson cypress andthe coastal redwood (Sequoia sempervirens) in particular have alldeveloped well and benefited from their location on a sheltered fertileslope. Douglas has been a consistently good performer at Avondale.

Although a number of the species, notably the redwoods, western redcedar, western hemlock and Lawson cypress are highly productive thismust be viewed in the context of the sheltered fertile sites on whichthey were planted.

Table 5: Larch species planted at Avondale and notes on performance.Species Common name Yield class PerformanceL. decidua European larch 8-12 Grew well. Good quality.L. kaempferi Japanese larch 10 Grew well. Good quality.L. occidentalis West American larch No records.? Tyrolese larch Poor.? Irish larch* No records.Larix decidua var polonica ? ? One line of trees planted. Canker resistant.

* It is unclear what species the ‘Irish larch’ was. Perhaps it was larch produced from seed obtained from older larch trees growing in Ireland.These would have been of European stock originally.

Table 4: Pine species planted at Avondale and notes on performance.

Species Common name Yield class PerformanceP. nigra var maritima Corsican pine 16 Good form. Was under planted with beech in 1957.P. pinaster Cluster pine - Could not compete with larch nurse.P. banksiana Jack pine - Poor. Suppressed by larch nurse.P. nigra var nigra Austrian pine - Poor.P. peuce Macedonian pine - Planted in 1916. Comparable with good Scots pine.P. sylvestris Scots pine 12 Poor quality and form.P. strobus Weymouth pine - Started well but died off.P. radiata Monterey pine 18 Survival poor. Growth impressive where it survived.P. sylvestris var rigensis ? - Poor.P. rigida Northern pitch pine - Poor.P. contorta Lodgepole pine (coastal) Was not tested until 1964 when it was planted in one of the clear felled Abies

procera plots. It grew vigorously, but was of poor form.

European larch grew consistently well at Avondale.

Broadleaf species

The broadleaf species tested are outlined in Table 7. The main results were:

• Pedunculate and sessile were originally planted together; their overallperformance has been disappointing, although they are far superior to all theother oak species, most of which failed.

• Oak grew better under larch, hornbeam or beech nurses than where it wasplanted pure. Beech was the best nurse, but it tended to out-perform the oak.

• Norway spruce dominated as a nurse. It suppressed all broadleaf specieswhen planted in mixture.

• Ash and hornbeam were ineffective as nurse for pedunculate oak.

• American oaks generally performed very poorly relative to European oaks.

• Spanish chestnut did best where planted pure. It was the most productive ofthe broadleaf species.

• As stated Norway spruce nurse suppressed all broadleaves, includinghornbeam, but the latter responded positively to European larch as a nurse,but its quality was poor.

Table 6: Other conifer species planted at Avondale with notes on performance.Species Common name Yield class PerformancePseudotsuga menziesii Douglas fir 16-20 Good. Oregon origin better than Colorado. Larch nurse.

Interior provenance also planted in 1929 and was poor.Tsuga heterophylla Western hemlock 22 Good. Prolific natural regeneration. An impressive plot.Tsuga canadensis canadensis (mertensiana) Mountain hemlock - Failed due to frost.Thuja plicata Western red cedar 22 Good. Larch nurse.Sequoia giganteum Giant redwood 20 Good. Larch nurse.Sequoia sempervirens Coast redwood 20 Good. Larch nurse.Cupressus lawsoniana Lawson cypress 18 Good. Larch nurse.Cupressus macrocarpa Monterey cypress - Bad frost damage. Poor survival but there are a few

excellent trees. Larch nurse.Cryptomeria japonica Japanese cypress - Bad frost damage. Form poor. Forked trees.Juniperus virginiana Eastern red cedar - Failed - taken over by larch nurse.Cedrus atlantica Atlantic cedar - Mixed, poor.Cedrus deodara Deodar cedar - Mixed, poor.

Western red cedar.Western hemlock grew well and has regenerated profusely.

Free-grown sessile oak on the edge ofthe Great Ride.

Table 7: Broadleaf species originally planted at Avondale and notes on performance.

Species Common name Performance

Acer pseudoplatanus Sycamore Grew reasonably well. Quality mediocre and may be related to provenance. Yield class 8.

Acer. platanoides Norway maple Poor. Grew well initially. Quality poor.

Acer dascycarpum Silver maple Poor. Outgrown by larch nurse. .

Acer saccharinum Sugar maple Poor. Outgrown by larch nurse.

Acer macrophyllum Oregon maple Poor. Badly affected by frost. Larch nurse grew well.

Carpinus betulus Hornbeam Good growth. Yield class 8. Suppressed by Norway spruce nurse. Best with larch nurse.

Castanea sativa Spanish chestnut Frost initially. Suppressed by larch nurse. Best where grown pure.

Fagus sylvatica Common beech Good growth and quality. Yield class 6.

Fraxinus excelsior European ash All ash species performed poorly.

Fraxinus spp. American ash All ash species performed poorly.

Fraxinus pubescens ? Failed.

Fraxinus latifolia Oregon ash All ash species performed poorly.

Quercus petraea Sessile oak Mediocre. Yield Class 6-8. Best oak species. Larch and hornbeam effective as nurse. NSsuppressed the oak.

Quercus robur Pedunculate oak Mediocre. Yield class 4 - 8. Second best oak species. Dominated by beech nurse. Ash andhornbeam were not effective as nurse species. NS suppressed oak.

Quercus frainnetto Hungarian oak Grew well initially. Yield class 4. Poor records.

Quercus coccinea Scarlet oak Poor. Yield class 6!

Quercus velutina Black oak Failed.

Quercus palustris Pin oak Failed.

Quercus borealis Red oak Frost damaged. Beech nurse which is now dominant.

Quercus cerris Turkey oak Failed. Yield class 4. Poor records.

Quercus pannonica ? Failed.

Quercus tinctoria ? Failed.

Ulmus procera English elm Slow start. Unimpressive. Not possible to differentiate the 4 species. All under planted in 1958.

Ulmus glabra Wych elm Slow start. Unimpressive. See above.

Ulmus x vegeta Chicester elm High mortality due to disease. Unimpressive. See above.

Ulmus americana American elm Unimpressive. See above.

Platanus orientalis Plane Poor survival.

Juglans nigra Walnut Poor records.

Liriodendron Tulip tree Died out.

Carya porcina Hickory Poor records.

Carya amara Hickory Poor records.

Pterocarya cauasica Causican wing nut Poor records.

Zelkova keaki Iron tree Poor. Note: Ostrya virginiana which is in the arboretum is also called Ironwood.

Prunus serotina Rum cherry Poor.

Prunus cerasus Cherry plum Poor.

Populus alba White poplar Did best of the poplars but poor.

Populus serotina Black Italian poplar Poor. Unhealthy.

Populus serotina nova Black Italian poplar Poor. Unhealthy.

• Information on the performance of the species in thelowermost 12 rows in Table 7 is lacking, but in generalnone showed any promise. Ash and European larchwere the nurse species.

Summary comments onperformance

Conifers

Of the 54 coniferous species tested in the initialexperimental plots and later trials only a relatively smallnumber were found to perform outstandingly well. Theseincluded Sitka spruce, Norway spruce, and Douglas fir.Grand fir had the highest yield class of all the conifers.However, its timber has limited use relative to the other highperforming species.

• Corsican pine performance is impressive and thespecies warrants further investigation.

• Monterey pine, where it survived, is outstandinglyimpressive. The performance warrants furtherinvestigation.

• European and Japanese larch performed consistentlywell. Their inherently lower yield class makes them aless attractive option for commercial forestry. However,the vigorous nature of many of the old trees remainsimpressive.

• Western hemlock performed well. Continues to bevigorous and healthy.

• Western red cedar performed well. Continues to bevigorous and healthy.

• Lawson cypress performed well. Continues to bevigorous and healthy

• The redwoods, notably the coast redwood, Sequoiasempervirens, continues to be impressive.

• Only four of these species now play a significant role inforestry in Ireland: Sitka spruce, Norway spruce,Douglas fir and larch, notably Japanese larch and

Douglas fir grew very well at Avondale. This group was planted in 1925 in Section V and has a mean diameter at breast heightof 80 cm and a top height of 31 m.

hybrid larch. The latter was not included in the originalplots. Lodgepole pine played a significant role in theafforestation programme in the 20th century but wasnot included in the initial experimental plots atAvondale. However, the performance of ‘an originalcoastal lodgepole pine tree’ at Avondale was said tohave influenced A.C. Forbes in deciding to favour thatprovenance of the species, rather than the inlandprovenance for the national afforestation programme.This had far-reaching consequences in that the coastalprovenance of the species was planted extensivelybetween the 1960s and 1990s on exposed sites,particularly in the west of Ireland, and tended to sufferfrom basal sweep.

The overall findings and performance of the coniferousspecies at Avondale over the last century vindicate currentpolicies on species selection. The key species, Sitka spruce,Norway spruce and Douglas fir, remain vigorous andhealthy and the most productive. Although a substantial areaof the Norway spruce planted in 1905 was blown in 1998,when it was 93 years old, one of the remaining plots(Section 4, plot 10) has a current mean height of 25.7 m anda mean DBH of 55.9 cm. In this particular plot, Norwayspruce was planted as a nurse with pedunculate oak butcompletely suppressed the latter. The Sitka spruce plantedin 1926 currently has a mean height of 35 m and a meanDBH of 67.0 cm. The performance of the species isimpressive given that it is recorded as having suffered fromsevere frost damage and aphid attack in the earlier years.

Species such as western hemlock, western red cedar,Monterey pine, Corsican pine, and Macedonian pinedeserve further consideration. Indeed the yield class for anumber of these species exceeds that for Norway spruce.Collectively, when taken as a group, they offer someopportunities for species diversification particularly onreasonably fertile sites.

Broadleaf species

A total of 45 broadleaf species was tested in the plots, 38 inthe original series followed by a further seven in later years.

In summary it can be said that only six of the broadleafspecies showed any promise, none had a yield class greaterthan 8 and quality of stems was generally poor to mediocre.

The most promising species included sycamore, Spanishchestnut, beech, sessile oak, pedunculate oak andhornbeam.

Although the quality of the sycamore is not overlyimpressive it is by far the best of the maples tested with anindicative yield class of 8. The two native oaks, althoughthey were generally unimpressive in terms of performance(yield class 4-8), were far better than the other species ofoak species tested, most of which failed.

Because of the lack of duplication of the plots, and paucityof data, it is not possible to state which of the two oaks,sessile or pedunculate, performed best.

The findings on mixtures were also far from clear althoughlarch, hornbeam and beech mixtures appeared to have apositive effect relative to pure plots of oak. However, beechtook over in both the sessile oak and pedunculate oak plotsand is now the dominant species. Larch was generally moreeffective as a nurse but suppressed Corsican pine,Weymouth pine and the other slower growing pine speciessuch as Jack pine and cluster pine. Larch also appears tohave been compatible with western red cedar, Lawsoncypress and the redwoods. However, it is not possible tostate if it had any positive effect on the growth of the nursedspecies.

Beech grew relatively well and had an indicative yield classof 6-8. The current stands are reasonably impressive and ofbetter quality that the other broadleaf species. Where beechwas planted as a nurse for sessile oak and pedunculate oakit tended to take over and dominate. The plots of both oakspecies in which beech was originally mixed are nowvirtually pure beech, with few oak remaining. Spanishchestnut was also promising although it suffered badly fromfrost in the earlier years.

Although a number of ash species were included in the plotseries none appear to have grown satisfactorily. The acidnature of the soils at Avondale and the severe frost damagein the earlier years of the trials may have had a negativeimpact on their performance. Their location on the lowerlying areas near the river may have aggravated this risk.

Mixtures are commonly planted in practice nowadays withlarch being a particularly well proven in terms of its nursingeffect, particularly on impoverished mineral soils. Larch isalso planted for other values related to amenity. Mixtures ofspruce and pine are also planted widely on peat soils in

particular but these were not included in the plots atAvondale. Neither were mixtures of Douglas fir and Sitkaspruce. These appear to be developing in interest. Mixingconifers with broadleaves at Avondale was particularlyunsuccessful because the former invariably out grew thelatter.

The Arboretum and PinetumIn addition to the experimental plots an Arboretum,covering an area of 17 ha and incorporating a Pinetum of6.75 ha, was also developed. Most of the planting here tookplace between 1905 and 1917 but the collection wasextended in the 1920s, 1940s and 1970s. By the mid 1970sit stood at 413 taxa spread over 123 genera.

At its inception the value of the arboretum was defined asfollows: ‘The principle upon which the arboretum and

pinetum have been laid down is that of demonstrating thebotanical character and ornamental value of all the hardytrees capable of thriving in the Irish climate. These twoadjuncts to the forest plots have both a botanical andarboricultural value, and while affording material for thebotanical instruction of students, they will also illustrate thecomparative values of the various species as ornamentalfeatures on the landscape, the garden or the vicinity of adwelling house’13.

The broadleaf species in the arboretum were laid down inclumps, groups and as single specimens planted among theold parkland trees. The pinetum was located on what wasoriginally bare ground east of the main house), the differentgenera being planted in larger masses, their distributioninfluenced by landscape features. The pines, spruces andfirs were planted in large groups and the less importantspecies as single trees.

Avondale pre-1900. Note the pinetum situated on the slope below the house. The field with the animals was planted withDouglas fir in the early 1900s, clearfelled in the 1960s after which it was replanted with Douglas fir and Sitka spruce.

13 MacOscair, P. 1978. Avondale Report. 2 Volumes. Coillte Library.

14 Carey, M. 2009. If trees could talk - Wicklow's trees and woodlands over four centuries. COFORD, Dublin.15 Neeson, E. 1991. A History of Irish Forestry. Lilliput Press.16 Coillte instigated a ‘Centenary Walk’ through the various species plots in 2004 to enable woodland owners and the public at large to access the areas and

review the performance of many of the species referred to. The walk is well signposted with explanatory labels on the more important species and plots.

Eight species of Eucalyptus were planted at Avondale in the springof 1950. A number of the species were killed off by frost, but one ofthese, E. delegatensis, is generating interest nowadays because ofits tolerance of low temperatures, rapid growth and versatility interms of end use.

The Forestry SchoolThe establishment of a forestry school formed anintegral part of the action plan at Avondale14.Between 1904 and 1915 a total of 44 studentscompleted the forestry course. By 1915 the originalplanting had been completed and in March of thatyear Avondale ceased to be a training school.However, Neeson claims the school closed in 1914‘partly as a war measure and partly because itseems, of a decision by Forbes as a result ofthreatened industrial action by the staff in sympathywith the General Strike of 1913’15.

The training requirements for forestry apprenticeswere reviewed in 1934 after which Avondale wasreopened as a forestry school. It remained there until1955 when it was moved to Shelton Abbey (CoWicklow) and later to Kinnitty Castle in Co Offalydue to the increased demand for extra space arisingfrom the larger number of forestry trainees.

ConclusionsA century after the Avondale initiative the forest areain the Republic of Ireland has reached 700,000 harepresenting a landscape cover of 10% comparedwith 1.6% at the dawn of the twentieth century. Thishas been a remarkable achievement, given the socio-economic background, and the fact that planting formost of the 20th century was confined to marginalland or land peripheral to the needs of agriculture.Although many of the new forests were planted onland of poorer quality than that at Avondale, theexperimental plots have provided a wealth ofinformation on species adaptability, suitability,stability and longevity. Little of this information wasavailable in 1903. Although the coniferous speciesfar outperformed the broadleaf species, increasedplanting of the latter in recent years has added to thevalue of the century old plots for those who are soengaged. Woodland owners can now visit the variousplots and envisage what their own woods may looklike at a similar age in the future with the caveat thatdifferences may arise due to site quality,management regime and source of seed16. The originof the seed for most of the trees planted in the initial

plots remains uncertain. Modern tree breeding initiatives are likelyto result in enhanced growth and adaptability for a wide range ofbroadleaf species.

The Forestry School at Avondale also achieved its objectives. Thestudents who trained there in the first two decades of the twentiethcentury, and later on in the 1930s and up to the mid 1950s andagain in the 1960s and 1970s, provided the background andexpertise needed to develop the successful state forestryprogramme, and more recently the expanding private forestryinitiatives.

AcknowledgementsJean Costello, Frank Daly, Conor Devane, Ted Lynch, BillMurphy.

Note: The use of trade, firm or corporation names in this publication is for the information of the reader. Such use does not constitute an official endorsement,or approval by COFORD of any product or service to the exclusion of others that may be suitable. Every effort is made to provide accurate and usefulinformation. However, COFORD assumes no legal liability for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or processdisclosed herein or for any loss or damage howsoever arising as a result of use, or reliance, on this information.